Analyzing readability of communications

ABSTRACT

A computer-implemented method, system, and computer program product for analyzing readability of a communication intended for a target audience includes: analyzing the communication to determine a first readability measure associated with the communication; determining a second readability measure associated with the target audience based on one or more historical communications previously transmitted or received by the target audience; and generating a readability feedback signal for the communication based on the first readability measure and the second readability measure.

BACKGROUND

The present disclosure relates to analyzing readability ofcommunications, and more particularly to analyzing readability ofcommunications between a provider and a target audience.

The present disclosure further relates to a computer program productcomprising computer-readable program code that enables a processor of asystem to implement such a method.

The present disclosure yet further relates to a system for analyzingreadability of communications, such as written communications,documents, reading material, etc.

The development of computers and communications networks has broughtabout the ability to easily communicate. However, a remaining disablerof communications is the matching of the communicated message/materialto a reading level/ability of its target audience. For example,communication may be hindered where a target audience (e.g. reader) isunable to easily understand the communicated material (e.g. readingmaterial).

There exist established metrics that can determine a readability (e.g.reading level) of written communications. For instance, there are toolsand websites that enable the generation of a ‘reading score’ for writtenmaterial based on a number of algorithms. Computer software has alsobeen developed for evaluating the readability of a document and forrevising a document to a different readability level. However, the useof this computer software for document revisions may be difficult andtime consuming.

SUMMARY

The present invention provides a computer-implemented method foranalyzing readability of a communication intended for a target audience.The method includes analyzing the communication to determine a firstreadability measure associated with the communication. The methodfurther includes determining a second readability measure associatedwith the target audience based on one or more historical communicationspreviously transmitted or received by the target audience. A readabilityfeedback signal for the communication is generated based on the firstreadability measure and the second readability measure.

The above summary is not intended to describe each illustratedembodiment or every implementation of the present disclosure.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

The drawings included in the present application are incorporated into,and form part of, the specification. They illustrate embodiments of thepresent disclosure and, along with the description, serve to explain theprinciples of the disclosure. The drawings are only illustrative ofcertain embodiments and do not limit the disclosure.

FIG. 1 depicts a pictorial representation of an example distributedsystem in which aspects of the illustrative embodiments may beimplemented, according to various embodiments.

FIG. 2 depicts a block diagram of an example system in which aspects ofthe illustrative embodiments may be implemented, according to variousembodiments.

FIG. 3 depicts a flow chart illustrating an exemplarycomputer-implemented method for analyzing readability of a communicationintended for a target audience in accordance with an embodiment,according to various embodiments.

FIG. 4 depicts a system for controlling access to protected informationstored in a database, according to various embodiments.

While the invention is amenable to various modifications and alternativeforms, specifics thereof have been shown by way of example in thedrawings and will be described in detail. It should be understood,however, that the intention is not to limit the invention to theparticular embodiments described. On the contrary, the intention is tocover all modifications, equivalents, and alternatives falling withinthe spirit and scope of the invention.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

It should be understood that the Figures are merely schematic and arenot drawn to scale. It should also be understood that the same referencenumerals are used throughout the Figures to indicate the same or similarparts.

In the context of the present application, where embodiments of thepresent invention constitute a method, it should be understood that sucha method is a process for execution by a computer, i.e. is acomputer-implementable method. The various steps of the method thereforereflect various parts of a computer program (e.g. various parts of oneor more algorithms).

Also, in the context of the present application, a system may be asingle device or a collection of distributed devices that are adapted toexecute one or more embodiments of the methods of the present invention.For instance, a system may be a personal computer (PC), a server or acollection of PCs and/or servers connected via a network, such as alocal area network, the Internet and so on, to cooperatively execute atleast one embodiment of the methods of the present invention.

Proposed is a concept for analyzing readability of a communicationintended for a target audience (such as an individual or group of peoplefor example). By determining: a first readability measure for thecommunication; and a second readability measure for the target audience,the readability measure may be analyzed to assess a suitability of thecommunication for the target audience. Feedback (such as a warningsignal or message) may then be provided based on the outcome of theassessment of the communication's suitability for the target audience.Thus, before a communication is provided to a target audience, anembodiment may be used to provide feedback on the suitability of thecommunication to its author. Such feedback may, for example, indicatethat the readability of the communication exceeds the readability levelof the target audience, thereby enabling the author to alter/modify thecommunication so that it better matches the readability level of thetarget audience. Proposed embodiments may therefore help to ensure thata communication is tailored to a readability level of its targetaudience (e.g. by providing a warning to the author if the communicationit too complex or too simple/basic compared to the reading ability ofthe target audience).

Proposed embodiments may help to ensure that written correspondence canbe understood by the intended receivers thereby avoiding a need to spendtime on additional clarification and/or preventing inaction because thewritten correspondence was not understood.

In particular, a proposed concept used in embodiments may be centered ondetermining a readability measure for the target audience by analyzingprevious or historical communications between the author (e.g. writer,creator or originator) of the communication and the target audience. Forinstance, where the communication is an email written by Person A forPerson B, previous written communications (such as emails, textmessages, social media interaction, internet messages, etc.) betweenPerson A and Person B may be analyzed to determine a readability measurefor Person B. Also, when determining this readability measure for PersonB, a weighting measure may be implemented according to whether aprevious communication was a direct communication (e.g. a single senderPerson A to single receiver Person B) or was between Person A and agroup of people/recipients within which Person B was included.Additionally, or alternatively, a weighting measure may be implementedaccording to the timing of the previous communication. For example, morerecent communications may be weighted so as to be of greater importance,influence, or relevance for determining the readability measure. In thisway, newer (or more recent) communications may be given more weight(e.g. via a temporal or time-based weighting value).

Where no information is available about previous or historicalcommunications between the author (e.g. Person A) of the communicationand the target audience (e.g. Person B), embodiments may determine areadability measure for the target audience by analyzing previous orhistorical communications transmitted and/or received by the targetaudience. In this way, proposed embodiments may cater for cases wherethe author has not previously communicated with the targetaudience/recipient(s). Also, as above, time-based weighting values maybe applied to (or associated with) the historical communications, forexample to make newer or more recent historical communications carrymore weight in the determination of the readability measure. Bydetermining a readability measure (e.g. reading score) for the targetaudience based on its previous communications (e.g. e-mails, textmessages, social media interactions, internet messages, etc.)embodiments may enable the determination of an appropriate level ofcomprehension of the target audience using historical information whichmay improve the accuracy of the readability measure. Situations wherethere have been no prior communications between the author and targetaudience may thus be catered for.

Accordingly, there may be provided an approach that, when composing anew message, calculates a reading score for the message and calculates areading level of the message's target audience. To calculate the readinglevel of the message's target audience, previous or historicalcommunications to/from the target audience may be analyzed to. In thisway, a large and/or detailed information resource relating tocommunication exchanges involving the target audience may be drawn uponto provide a more accurate determination of the reading level of targetaudience. The calculated score and reading level may then be comparedand a warning provided (e.g. via an audible and/or visual message) ifthey are too far apart (e.g. if a difference between the score andreading level exceeds a predetermined acceptable threshold amount).Where the target audience comprises more than one recipient entity, anumber of resolution algorithms may be used to determine an appropriatescore at which to warn the author. For example, embodiments may simplyuse the lowest score for all recipients as a warning threshold value, orif it's an e-mail, the lowest score for recipients in the ‘To’ field.

Also, where considered appropriate, skew can be applied between thetypical level of complexity that a person writes at and an ideal limitof the complexity that they are likely to comprehend at. For instance,some excellent writers may be capable of writing clear simple text whenthis is what is required, but in other situations may write at a muchhigher reading level. Embodiments may take into account the highestcommonly occupied writing/reading level by a target audience (e.g.recipient) understanding that notes from the target audience aresometimes simple as the message is simple.

Embodiments may thus provide concepts that facilitate the efficientcreation and adjustment of written communications for a target audience.Such a target audience may comprise a single person or a group ofpeople.

By way of further example, embodiments may propose extensions to writtencommunication authoring tools for indicating whether communications areof an appropriate readability level for a target audience. Suchextensions may provide constraints on how a communication shouldpreferably be authored or created in order to take advantage of theproposed concepts. In this way, an author or creator of a communicationmay be assisted in the provision of appropriate written material.

Also, it is noted that, although embodiments are presented in thecontext of being applicable in the relation to written electroniccommunications, applicability of the proposed concepts may extend toother fields where written material or communications may need to beadapted for a target audience and/or where communications between anauthor/originator and a target audience take place. For example,embodiments may be implemented in relation to social media interactionswhere an author or creator of a social media message should be preventedfrom communicating a message that is overly simple/basic or complex forits intended audience.

Illustrative embodiments may therefore provide concepts analyzingreadability of a communication intended for a target audience. Dynamicanalysis and communication adjustment concepts may therefore be providedby proposed embodiments.

Modifications and additional steps to a traditional data storage andretrieval systems may also be proposed which may enhance the value andutility of the proposed concepts.

Communications can include, but are not limited to, writtencommunications, documents, reading material, electronic and hard copytext materials, books, manuals, magazines, newspapers, word processdocuments, web page documents, email, and the like. By use of thesubject matter disclosed herein, such communications may be adjusted toa specified target readability level. Accordingly, as used herein, theterm “communication” may refer to any communication containinghuman-readable content, such as text. Examples of such include adocument, a book, a manual, speech text, or any non-electronic hard copymaterial. A communication can be a text document produced in electronicform by typing into a keyboard of a computer using a text editor or wordprocessor. For example, a communication may include a markup languagedocument (e.g., a hypertext mark-up language (HTML) web page), textembedded in a markup language document, an email, and the like.Alternatively, a communication can be in a hard copy format that isreceived by scanning reading material with an optical characterrecognition device. Further, a communication may be input by speech intoa speech recognition device or program.

The term “readability” may refer to a reading difficulty level of textin a communication. Several readability formulas or processes may beused for determining a readability level. Such readability formulas orprocesses may utilize mathematical formulas and/or computer or manualprocesses. In such processes, text of the communication may be scannedand analyzed to determine readability using suitable standards andmeasures such as, but not limited to, those described herein.

As used herein, the term “readability measure” may refer to any suitablemeasure of the readability of text in a communication. Also, in thecontext of a target audience, a readability measure of a target audiencemay refer to a measure of the readability (e.g. difficulty level orscore) of text in a communication that can be easily understood, handledor otherwise coped with by the target audience.

Examples of readability measures include number of syllables in a wordand/or sentence, number of grammatical errors (e.g., the number orproportion of sentences having grammatical errors), number or proportionof misspelled words, number or proportion of unfamiliar words (asdefined by a word list that identifies unfamiliar words in any suitablemanner), number or proportion of inappropriate or misused words, and thelike. Another exemplary readability measure may include the total numberof paragraphs, sentences, and/or words in the reading material. Yetanother exemplary readability measure may include the total number orproportion of foreign language words (as defined by a word list whichidentifies foreign language words) in a communication. Another exemplaryreadability measure may include any standard or measure of correct orincorrect punctuation. Another exemplary readability measure may includeany count or proportion of included abbreviations and/or missingpunctuation. Another exemplary readability measure may include any countor proportion of “white space,” such as, but not limited to, spaces,tabs, carriage returns, line feeds, new lines, and the like. Anotherexemplary readability measure may include any count or proportion ofnon-textual elements, such as, but not limited to, images, pictures,diagrams, colors, fonts, and the like. Another exemplary readabilitymeasure may include any measure of writing style, such as, but notlimited to, active versus passive voice, narrative, sentence structure,paragraph structure, essay structure, grammatical correctness, corrector incorrect word use, and the like. In another example, a readabilitymeasure may include a number or proportion of familiar words as definedby a word list which identifies familiar words, such as a Dale-Challlist and a list of common words for English as a second language. Inanother example, a readability measure may include word frequency suchas an average word frequency as determined by a list of words and theirfrequencies, which may be determined by any suitable means, such as, butnot limited to, an analysis of a standard corpus of documents, books,manuals, or any other text. In yet another example, a readabilitymeasure may include sentence length such as, but not limited to, anaverage number of words in a sentence, a number or proportion ofsentences exceeding a specified sentence length, or are ranked by a setof specified sentence lengths. In another example, a readability measuremay include a number or proportion of paragraphs or passages whichexceed a specified length, or are ranked by a set of specified lengths.Additional examples may include total number of grammatical errors,average number of grammatical errors per sentence, total number ofmisspelled words, percentage of misspelled words, number of sentences inthe passive voice, number of sentences with multiple clauses, number ofpreviously identified phrases or words that are to be avoided, and anyother quantitative measure of the text or language content.

A readability level of a communication can be determined based on a scanof the text of the communication. For example, the text may be scannedto calculate the average sentence length of each sentence in words, theaverage frequency or commonality measure for each word from a wordfrequency index or standard corpus, and the average number of syllablesin each word. A formula or process for determining the readability levelcan use the resulting averages and calculate the readability level.Exemplary readability formulas or processes include the FleschReadability Index, the Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level, the Fog Index, theBormuth Grade Level Readability Score, the Lexile Framework for Reading,and the like. A readability level as described herein can be calculatedusing any of these exemplary formulas or processes.

In examples provided herein, the readability level may be based onnumbers, and lower numeric levels may indicate more-readable text (inwhich cases, decreasing readability levels correlate to increasingreadability). If a subject readability system or process provides forreadability levels that are scored in such a manner such that higherscores correspond to more readable text, then the readabilitylevel/scale of the subject system or process is reversed by multiplyingthe level calculated and reported by that readability system by −1(i.e., negative one). Thus, concepts proposed herein may be applied toany readability scale, whether increasing or decreasing. Although it maybe assumed herein that the readability level is based on numbers, anyother suitable indicia may be used for indicating the readability levelof reading material.

A readability level or score may be determined by a suitable formula orprocess which may depend on various basic readability measures such asaverage sentence length of the reading material, average word frequencycompared to a standard corpus, average number of syllables in a word,average number of grammatical errors per sentence, and the like.

According to one aspect, a system for adjusting readability of readingmaterial to a target readability level may be implemented as hardware,software, and/or firmware components executing on or with one or moremodules of a system operable to receive and store communications.Illustrative embodiments may be utilized in many different types ofmessaging processing environments. In order to provide a context for thedescription of elements and functionality of the illustrativeembodiments, FIGS. 1 and 2 are provided hereafter as exampleenvironments in which aspects of the illustrative embodiments may beimplemented. It should be appreciated that FIGS. 1 and 2 are onlyexamples and are not intended to assert or imply any limitation withregard to the environments in which aspects or embodiments of thepresent invention may be implemented. Many modifications to the depictedenvironments may be made without departing from the spirit and scope ofthe present invention.

FIG. 1 depicts a pictorial representation of an example distributed datastorage system in which aspects of the illustrative embodiments may beimplemented. Distributed system 100 may include a network of computersin which aspects of the illustrative embodiments may be implemented. Thedistributed system 100 contains at least one network 102, which is themedium used to provide communication links between various devices andcomputers connected together within the distributed data processingsystem 100. The network 102 may include connections, such as wire,wireless communication links, or fiber optic cables.

In the depicted example, a first server 104 and second server 106 areconnected to the network 102 along with a storage unit 108. In addition,clients 110, 112, and 114 are also connected to the network 102. Theclients 110, 112, and 114 may be, for example, personal computers,network computers, or the like. In the depicted example, the firstserver 104 provides data, such as boot files, operating system images,and applications to the clients 110, 112, and 114. Clients 110, 112, and114 are clients to the first server 104 in the depicted example. Thedistributed processing system 100 may include additional servers,clients, and other devices not shown.

In the depicted example, the distributed system 100 is the Internet withthe network 102 representing a worldwide collection of networks andgateways that use the Transmission Control Protocol/Internet Protocol(TCP/IP) suite of protocols to communicate with one another. At theheart of the Internet is a backbone of high-speed data communicationlines between major nodes or host computers, consisting of thousands ofcommercial, governmental, educational and other computer systems thatroute data and messages. Of course, the distributed system 100 may alsobe implemented to include a number of different types of networks, suchas for example, an intranet, a local area network (LAN), a wide areanetwork (WAN), or the like. As stated above, FIG. 1 is intended as anexample, not as an architectural limitation for different embodiments ofthe present invention, and therefore, the particular elements shown inFIG. 1 should not be considered limiting with regard to the environmentsin which the illustrative embodiments of the present invention may beimplemented.

FIG. 2 is a block diagram of an example system 200 in which aspects ofthe illustrative embodiments may be implemented. The system 200 is anexample of a computer, such as client 110 in FIG. 1, in which computerusable code or instructions implementing the processes for illustrativeembodiments of the present invention may be located.

In the depicted example, the system 200 employs a hub architectureincluding a north bridge and memory controller hub (NB/MCH) 202 and asouth bridge and input/output (I/O) controller hub (SB/ICH) 204. Aprocessing unit 206, a main memory 208, and a graphics processor 210 areconnected to NB/MCH 202. The graphics processor 210 may be connected tothe NB/MCH 202 through an accelerated graphics port (AGP).

In the depicted example, a local area network (LAN) adapter 212 connectsto SB/ICH 204. An audio adapter 216, a keyboard and a mouse adapter 220,a modem 222, a read only memory (ROM) 224, a hard disk drive (HDD) 226,a CD-ROM drive 230, a universal serial bus (USB) ports and othercommunication ports 232, and PCI/PCIe devices 234 connect to the SB/ICH204 through first bus 238 and second bus 240. PCI/PCIe devices 234 mayinclude, for example, Ethernet adapters, add-in cards, and PC cards fornotebook computers. PCI uses a card bus controller, while PCIe does not.ROM 224 may be, for example, a flash basic input/output system (BIOS).

The HDD 226 and CD-ROM drive 230 connect to the SB/ICH 204 throughsecond bus 240. The HDD 226 and CD-ROM drive 230 may use, for example,an integrated drive electronics (IDE) or a serial advanced technologyattachment (SATA) interface. Super I/O (SIO) device 236 may be connectedto SB/ICH 204.

An operating system runs on the processing unit 206. The operatingsystem coordinates and provides control of various components within thesystem 200 in FIG. 2. As a client, the operating system may be acommercially available operating system. An object-oriented programmingsystem, such as the Java™ programming system, may run in conjunctionwith the operating system and provides calls to the operating systemfrom Java™ programs or applications executing on system 200.

As a server, system 200 may be, for example, an IBM® eServer™ System p®computer system, running the Advanced Interactive Executive (AIX®)operating system or the LINUX® operating system. The system 200 may be asymmetric multiprocessor (SMP) system including a plurality ofprocessors in processing unit 206. Alternatively, a single processorsystem may be employed.

Instructions for the operating system, the programming system, andapplications or programs are located on storage devices, such as HDD226, and may be loaded into main memory 208 for execution by processingunit 206. Similarly, one or more message processing programs accordingto an embodiment may be adapted to be stored by the storage devicesand/or the main memory 208.

The processes for illustrative embodiments of the present invention maybe performed by processing unit 206 using computer usable program code,which may be located in a memory such as, for example, main memory 208,ROM 224, or in one or more peripheral devices 226 and 230.

A bus system, such as first bus 238 or second bus 240 as shown in FIG.2, may comprise one or more buses. Of course, the bus system may beimplemented using any type of communication fabric or architecture thatprovides for a transfer of data between different components or devicesattached to the fabric or architecture. A communication unit, such asthe modem 222 or the network adapter 212 of FIG. 2, may include one ormore devices used to transmit and receive data. A memory may be, forexample, main memory 208, ROM 224, or a cache such as found in NB/MCH202 in FIG. 2.

Those of ordinary skill in the art will appreciate that the hardware inFIGS. 1 and 2 may vary depending on the implementation. Other internalhardware or peripheral devices, such as flash memory, equivalentnon-volatile memory, or optical disk drives and the like, may be used inaddition to or in place of the hardware depicted in FIGS. 1 and 2. Also,the processes of the illustrative embodiments may be applied to amultiprocessor data processing system, other than the system mentionedpreviously, without departing from the spirit and scope of the presentinvention.

Moreover, the system 200 may take the form of any of a number ofdifferent data processing systems including client computing devices,server computing devices, a tablet computer, laptop computer, telephoneor other communication device, a personal digital assistant (PDA), orthe like. In some illustrative examples, the system 200 may be aportable computing device that is configured with flash memory toprovide non-volatile memory for storing operating system files and/oruser-generated data, for example. Thus, the system 200 may essentiallybe any known or later-developed data processing system withoutarchitectural limitation.

A proposed concept may enhance a communication system by providingfeedback on whether a readability of a communication intended for atarget audience is appropriate for the target audience. Embodiments maydetermine a readability measure or level that is appropriate for thetarget audience by analyzing previous/historical communication exchangesinvolving the target audience. Historical information relating to priorcommunication sent to/from the target audience may therefore beleveraged in order or to ascertain a readability measure or level forthe target audience. More detailed and/or extensive information maytherefore be drawn upon to provide a more accurate determination of thetarget audience's reading level. Such proposals can extend or improvethe readability analysis capabilities of a communication system.

FIG. 3 is a flow chart illustrating an exemplary computer-implementedmethod 300 for analyzing readability of a communication intended for atarget audience in accordance with an embodiment of the subject matterdescribed herein.

The method begins in step 310 by obtaining a communication intended fora target audience. Here, the communication may be in a digital format orany other suitable format that can be analyzed by a computer system. Forinstance, the communication may comprise at least one of: electronictext material; an electronic document; a web page document; anelectronic message; and an email. By way of further example, thecommunication may be transmitted to the system (e.g. via the Internet)or may be generated within the system (e.g. by an author typing writtencontent for the communication using a word processor, email application,messaging client, etc.). Also, information about the target audience maybe provided as part of the communication and/or separately indicated bya user.

In step 320, the communication is analyzed to determine a firstreadability measure associated with the communication. In this example,the first readability measure may comprise a numerical valuerepresentative of a readability level of the communication. Manydifferent approaches to the analysis may be used. Indeed, a wide rangeof methods for determining a readability measure are known. Accordingly,detailed explanation of how the first readability measure is determinedis hereby omitted. However, purely by way of example only, the followingequation may be used for indicating a readability formula or process bywhich readability measures can be determined:r=f(x1,x2,x3, . . . ,xn)  (1)

In equation (1) above, the variables x1, . . . , xn represent basicreadability measures, such as average sentence length, average wordfrequency, average number of syllables in a word, and the like. Thevalue r given by equation (1) is assumed to be such that decreasingvalues of r correspond to more easily read text. Accordingly, step 320may employ any suitable readability formula or process which conforms toequation (1) for any number of basic first readability measures. Forexample, the Flesch-Kincaid reading level may be provided by the formular=f(x1, x2), where x1 is the average sentence length, and x2 is theaverage number of syllables in a word. The value r in this caserepresents the grade level of the text, such that lower levels indicatemore easily read (more readable) text. It will be appreciated that otherapproaches may be employed, included (but not limited to): a FleschReadability Index; a Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level; a Fog Index; a BormuthGrade Level Readability Score; and a Lexile Framework for Reading.

In one example of determining the first readability measure in step 320,the communication may be scanned and basic readability measures x1, x2,. . . , xn may be calculated in accordance with readability measuresdefined by a predetermined set of rules.

In step 330, a second readability measure associated with the targetaudience is determined based on one or more historical communicationspreviously transmitted or received by the target audience.

Here, where previous communications between the author of thecommunication and the target audience have occurred, the step 330 ofdetermining a second readability measure associated with the targetaudience may comprise the step 332 of identifying, from the one or morehistorical communications, a historical communication between an authorof the communication and the target audience. A primary historicalreadability measure may then be determined in step 334 based on theidentified historical communication between the author of thecommunication and the target audience. Also, a weighting valueassociated with the primary historical readability measure may bedetermined in step 336 based on at least one of: a time at which theidentified historical communication between the author of thecommunication and the target audience was transmitted or received by anadditional audience; and whether the identified historical communicationbetween the author of the communication and the target audience wastransmitted or received by an additional audience. Based on: (i) theprimary historical readability measure; and (ii) the weighting valueassociated with the primary historical readability measure, the secondreadability measure associated with the target audience may then bedetermined in step 338. Thus, it will be understood that the step 330 ofdetermining a second readability measure associated with the targetaudience may comprise sub-steps 332-338 which may analyze previouscommunications between the author and target audience so as to derive anindication of a readability of the target audience. Since such priordialogue or communication between the author and target audience may behighly relevant for indicating a preferential or established level ofreadability when communicating between the author and target audience,historical readability measures obtained using such historicalcommunications may be thought of as being ‘primary’ for the purpose ofassessing a preferred readability level.

Alternatively, or additionally, previous/historical communications notbetween the author of the communication and the target audience may alsobe analyzed for the purpose of determining the second readabilitymeasure associated with the target audience. Thus, by way of example,the step 330 of determining a second readability measure associated withthe target audience may comprise the step 340 of identifying, from theone or more historical communications, a historical communication notbetween the author of the communication and the target audience. Asecondary historical readability measure may then be determined in step342 based on the identified historical communication not between theauthor of the communication and the target audience. Also, a weightingvalue associated with the secondary historical readability measure maybe determined in step 344 based on whether the identified historicalcommunication not between the author of the communication and the targetaudience was transmitted or received by an additional audience. Basedon: (i) the secondary historical readability measure; and (ii) theweighting value associated with the secondary historical readabilitymeasure, the second readability measure associated with the targetaudience may then be determined in step 346. Thus, it will be understoodthat the step 330 of determining a second readability measure associatedwith the target audience may comprise sub-steps 340-346 which mayanalyze previous communications involving the target audience (and notthe author) so as to derive an indication of a readability of the targetaudience. Since such prior dialogue or communication employed by targetaudience may be relevant for indicating a preferential or establishedlevel of readability of the target audience, historical readabilitymeasures obtained using such historical communications not involving theauthor of the communication may be thought of as being ‘secondary’ forthe purpose of assessing a preferred readability level.

In step 350, readability feedback signal for the communication isgenerated based on the first and second readability measures. Forexample, the step 350 of this example may comprise comparing (in step352) the first and second readability measures (as obtained from steps320 and 330 respectively) and then generating (in step 354) thereadability feedback signal based on the result of the comparison. Forinstance, a warning signal may be generated if the result of thecomparison (in step 352) indicates that a difference between the firstand second readability measures exceeds a predetermined acceptablethreshold (in other words, if the first readability measure is above orbelow the second readability measure by more than a predefined amount).

From the above description, it will be understood that proposedembodiments may employ the concept of determining a (second) readabilitymeasure for the target audience by analyzing previous or historicalcommunications involving the target audience. In doing so, previous orhistorical communications between the author (e.g. writer, creator ororiginator) of the communication and the target audience may be analyzedas being preferential for the purpose of determining a targetreadability measure for the communication. However, in some instances,information regarding previous or historical communications between theauthor (e.g. writer, creator or originator) of the communication and thetarget audience may not be available (e.g. because they have neveroccurred before). Proposed may cater for this by also being adapted toanalyze previous or historical communications involving the targetaudience (but not the author of the communication) in order to determinea target readability measure for the communication. Of course, acombination of such analysis may be used. For example, it may be usefulto refine a target readability measure for the communication that hasbeen determined based only on very old historical communications betweenthe author of the communication and the target audience, and this may bedone by analyzing more recent communications involving the targetaudience (but not the author of the communication) to see if a change ina readability capability of the target audience has occurred.

By way of further explanation, an exemplary embodiment will now bedescribed as follows:

(I) The author of an email adds a target recipient to the e-mail.

(II) A readability score for the recipient is calculated based onprevious communications of the recipient from all text sources e.g.e-mail, instant messaging, tweets etc.

(II)(a) Any direct communication (e.g. a direct message between theauthor and the recipient) is scored in preference to any indirectcommunication (e.g. a message involving other recipients in addition tothe (current) target recipient). In this way, direct messages may beused in preference to public slack-channel conversations (although aprivate channel may be used with a higher preference).

(II)(b) In the absence of any existing communications either becausethere weren't any, or they aren't available for analysis then:(ii)(b)(1) peers of the recipient are determined through sources such asa company directory or public social media profiles; and (ii)(b)(2)reading score for the recipient is generated based on their peercommunications with the same preferences as in step (ii)(a) above.

(III) While the e-mail is being composed: (i) the current readabilityscore of the email is determined: (ii) the author is warned if thecurrent readability score exceeds the readability score for therecipient. In the event of multiple recipients, the lowest score ofpeople in the addressee/‘to’ field of the email may be used as thewarning baseline/threshold.

In some embodiments, there may be provided a system comprising aprocessing arrangement adapted to carry out any method previouslydescribed with reference to FIGS. 1 to 3.

By way of example, as illustrated in FIG. 4, embodiments may comprise acomputer system 70, which may form part of a networked system 7. Thecomponents of computer system/server 70 may include, but are not limitedto, one or more processing arrangements, for example comprisingprocessors or processing units 71, a system memory 74, and a bus 90 thatcouples various system components including system memory 74 toprocessing unit 71.

Bus 90 represents one or more of any of several types of bus structures,including a memory bus or memory controller, a peripheral bus, anaccelerated graphics port, and a processor or local bus using any of avariety of bus architectures. By way of example, and not limitation,such architectures include Industry Standard Architecture (ISA) bus,Micro Channel Architecture (MCA) bus, Enhanced ISA (EISA) bus, VideoElectronics Standards Association (VESA) local bus, and PeripheralComponent Interconnect (PCI) bus.

Computer system/server 70 typically includes a variety of computersystem readable media. Such media may be any available media that isaccessible by computer system/server 70, and it includes both volatileand non-volatile media, removable and non-removable media.

System memory 74 can include computer system readable media in the formof volatile memory, such as random access memory (RAM) 75 and/or cachememory 76. Computer system/server 70 may further include otherremovable/non-removable, volatile/non-volatile computer system storagemedia. By way of example only, storage system 74 can be provided forreading from and writing to a non-removable, non-volatile magnetic media(not shown and typically called a “hard drive”). Although not shown, amagnetic disk drive for reading from and writing to a removable,non-volatile magnetic disk (e.g., a “floppy disk”), and an optical diskdrive for reading from or writing to a removable, non-volatile opticaldisk such as a CD-ROM, DVD-ROM or other optical media can be provided.In such instances, each can be connected to bus 90 by one or more datamedia interfaces. As will be further depicted and described below,memory 74 may include at least one program product having a set (e.g.,at least one) of program modules that are configured to carry out thefunctions of embodiments of the invention.

Program/utility 78, having a set (at least one) of program modules 79,may be stored in memory 74 by way of example, and not limitation, aswell as an operating system, one or more application programs, otherprogram modules, and program data. Each of the operating system, one ormore application programs, other program modules, and program data orsome combination thereof, may include an implementation of a networkingenvironment. Program modules 79 generally carry out the functions and/ormethodologies of embodiments of the invention as described herein.

Computer system/server 70 may also communicate with one or more externaldevices 80 such as a keyboard, a pointing device, a display 85, etc.;one or more devices that enable a user to interact with computersystem/server 70; and/or any devices (e.g., network card, modem, etc.)that enable computer system/server 70 to communicate with one or moreother computing devices. Such communication can occur via Input/Output(I/O) interfaces 72. Still yet, computer system/server 70 cancommunicate with one or more networks such as a local area network(LAN), a general wide area network (WAN), and/or a public network (e.g.,the Internet) via network adapter 73. As depicted, network adapter 73communicates with the other components of computer system/server 70 viabus 90. It should be understood that although not shown, other hardwareand/or software components could be used in conjunction with computersystem/server 70. Examples, include, but are not limited to: microcode,device drivers, redundant processing units, external disk drive arrays,RAID systems, tape drives, and data archival storage systems, etc.

In the context of the present application, where embodiments of thepresent invention constitute a method, it should be understood that sucha method is a process for execution by a computer, i.e. is acomputer-implementable method. The various steps of the method thereforereflect various parts of a computer program, e.g. various parts of oneor more algorithms.

The present invention may be a system, a method, and/or a computerprogram product. The computer program product may include a computerreadable storage medium (or media) having computer readable programinstructions thereon for causing a processor to carry out aspects of thepresent invention.

The computer readable storage medium can be a tangible device that canretain and store instructions for use by an instruction executiondevice. The computer readable storage medium may be, for example, but isnot limited to, an electronic storage device, a magnetic storage device,an optical storage device, an electromagnetic storage device, asemiconductor storage device, or any suitable combination of theforegoing. A non-exhaustive list of more specific examples of thecomputer readable storage medium includes the following: a portablecomputer diskette, a hard disk, a random access memory (RAM), aread-only memory (ROM), an erasable programmable read-only memory (EPROMor Flash memory), a storage class memory (SCM), a static random accessmemory (SRAM), a portable compact disc read-only memory (CD-ROM), adigital versatile disk (DVD), a memory stick, a floppy disk, amechanically encoded device such as punch-cards or raised structures ina groove having instructions recorded thereon, and any suitablecombination of the foregoing. A computer readable storage medium, asused herein, is not to be construed as being transitory signals per se,such as radio waves or other freely propagating electromagnetic waves,electromagnetic waves propagating through a waveguide or othertransmission media (e.g., light pulses passing through a fiber-opticcable), or electrical signals transmitted through a wire.

Computer readable program instructions described herein can bedownloaded to respective computing/processing devices from a computerreadable storage medium or to an external computer or external storagedevice via a network, for example, the Internet, a local area network, awide area network and/or a wireless network. The network may comprisecopper transmission cables, optical transmission fibers, wirelesstransmission, routers, firewalls, switches, gateway computers and/oredge servers. A network adapter card or network interface in eachcomputing/processing device receives computer readable programinstructions from the network and forwards the computer readable programinstructions for storage in a computer readable storage medium withinthe respective computing/processing device.

Computer readable program instructions for carrying out operations ofthe present invention may be assembler instructions,instruction-set-architecture (ISA) instructions, machine instructions,machine dependent instructions, microcode, firmware instructions,state-setting data, or either source code or object code written in anycombination of one or more programming languages, including an objectoriented programming language such as Smalltalk, C++ or the like, andconventional procedural programming languages, such as the “C”programming language or similar programming languages. The computerreadable program instructions may execute entirely on the user'scomputer, partly on the user's computer, as a stand-alone softwarepackage, partly on the user's computer and partly on a remote computeror entirely on the remote computer or server. In the latter scenario,the remote computer may be connected to the user's computer through anytype of network, including a local area network (LAN) or a wide areanetwork (WAN), or the connection may be made to an external computer(for example, through the Internet using an Internet Service Provider).In some embodiments, electronic circuitry including, for example,programmable logic circuitry, field-programmable gate arrays (FPGA), orprogrammable logic arrays (PLA) may execute the computer readableprogram instructions by utilizing state information of the computerreadable program instructions to personalize the electronic circuitry,in order to perform aspects of the present invention.

Aspects of the present invention are described herein with reference toflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams of methods, apparatus(systems), and computer program products according to embodiments of theinvention. It will be understood that each block of the flowchartillustrations and/or block diagrams, and combinations of blocks in theflowchart illustrations and/or block diagrams, can be implemented bycomputer readable program instructions.

These computer readable program instructions may be provided to aprocessor of a general-purpose computer, special purpose computer, orother programmable data processing apparatus to produce a machine, suchthat the instructions, which execute via the processor of the computeror other programmable data processing apparatus, create means forimplementing the functions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or blockdiagram block or blocks. These computer readable program instructionsmay also be stored in a computer readable storage medium that can directa computer, a programmable data processing apparatus, and/or otherdevices to function in a particular manner, such that the computerreadable storage medium having instructions stored therein comprises anarticle of manufacture including instructions which implement aspects ofthe function/act specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram blockor blocks.

The computer readable program instructions may also be loaded onto acomputer, other programmable data processing apparatus, or other deviceto cause a series of operational steps to be performed on the computer,other programmable apparatus or other device to produce a computerimplemented process, such that the instructions which execute on thecomputer, other programmable apparatus, or other device implement thefunctions/acts specified in the flowchart and/or block diagram block orblocks.

The flowchart and block diagrams in the figures illustrate thearchitecture, functionality, and operation of possible implementationsof systems, methods, and computer program products according to variousembodiments of the present invention. In this regard, each block in theflowchart or block diagrams may represent a module, segment, or portionof instructions, which comprises one or more executable instructions forimplementing the specified logical function(s). In some alternativeimplementations, the functions noted in the block may occur out of theorder noted in the figures. For example, two blocks shown in successionmay, in fact, be executed substantially concurrently, or the blocks maysometimes be executed in the reverse order, depending upon thefunctionality involved. It will also be noted that each block of theblock diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, and combinations of blocksin the block diagrams and/or flowchart illustration, can be implementedby special purpose hardware-based systems that perform the specifiedfunctions or acts or carry out combinations of special purpose hardwareand computer instructions.

The descriptions of the various embodiments of the present inventionhave been presented for purposes of illustration, but are not intendedto be exhaustive or limited to the embodiments disclosed. Manymodifications and variations will be apparent to those of ordinary skillin the art without departing from the scope and spirit of the describedembodiments. The terminology used herein was chosen to best explain theprinciples of the embodiments, the practical application or technicalimprovement over technologies found in the marketplace, or to enableothers of ordinary skill in the art to understand the embodimentsdisclosed herein.

What is claimed is:
 1. A computer-implemented method for analyzingreadability of a communication intended for a target audience, themethod comprising: analyzing the communication to determine a firstreadability measure associated with the communication, wherein the firstreadability measure includes a numerical value indicating a readingdifficulty level of text in the communication; determining a secondreadability measure associated with the target audience based on one ormore historical communications previously transmitted or received by thetarget audience; and generating a readability feedback signal for thecommunication based on the first readability measure and the secondreadability measure.
 2. The method of claim 1, wherein determining thesecond readability measure associated with the target audiencecomprises: identifying, from the one or more historical communications,a historical communication between an author of the communication andthe target audience; determining a primary historical readabilitymeasure based on the identified historical communication between theauthor of the communication and the target audience; and determining thesecond readability measure associated with the target audience based onthe primary historical readability measure.
 3. The method of claim 2,wherein determining the second readability measure associated with thetarget audience further comprises: determining a weighting valueassociated with the primary historical readability measure based onwhether the identified historical communication between the author ofthe communication and the target audience was transmitted or received byan additional audience, wherein the determining the second readabilitymeasure associated with the target audience is further based on theweighting value associated with the primary historical readabilitymeasure.
 4. The method of claim 2, wherein determining the secondreadability measure associated with the target audience furthercomprises: determining a temporal weighting value associated with theprimary historical readability measure based on a time at which theidentified historical communication between the author of thecommunication and the target audience was transmitted or received by anadditional audience, wherein the determining the second readabilitymeasure associated with the target audience is further based on thetemporal weighting value associated with the primary historicalreadability measure.
 5. The method of claim 2, wherein determining thesecond readability measure associated with the target audience furthercomprises: identifying, from the one or more historical communications,a historical communication not between the author of the communicationand the target audience; determining a secondary primary historicalreadability measure based on the identified historical communication notbetween the author of the communication and the target audience; anddetermining the second readability measure associated with the targetaudience based on the secondary historical readability measure.
 6. Themethod of claim 5, wherein determining the second readability measureassociated with the target audience further comprises: determining aweighting value associated with the secondary historical readabilitymeasure based on whether the identified historical communication notbetween the author of the communication and the target audience wastransmitted or received by an additional audience, wherein thedetermining the second readability measure associated with the targetaudience is further based on the weighting value associated with thesecondary historical readability measure.
 7. The method of claim 1,wherein generating the readability feedback signal comprises: comparingthe first readability measure and the second readability measure; andgenerating the readability feedback signal based on a result of thecomparing.
 8. The method of claim 7, wherein generating the readabilityfeedback signal comprises generating a warning signal when the result ofthe comparison indicates that a difference between the first readabilitymeasure and the second readability measure exceeds a threshold.
 9. Themethod of claim 1, wherein the communication comprises at least one of:an electronic text material, an electronic document, a web pagedocument, an electronic message, and an email.
 10. The method of claim1, wherein the first readability measure and the second readabilitymeasure each comprise a numerical value representative of a readabilitylevel.
 11. The method of claim 1, wherein the first readability measureand the second readability measure comprise at least one of: a number ofsyllables in a word and/or sentence, a number of grammatical errors, anumber and proportion of misspelled words, a number and proportion ofunfamiliar words, a number and proportion of inappropriate or misusedwords, a number of paragraphs, a number of sentences, a number of words,a number and proportion of foreign language words, a measure of correctand incorrect punctuation, a proportion of white spaces, a proportion ofnon-textual elements, a measure of writing style, a number ofabbreviations used, and a word frequency.
 12. The method of claim 1,wherein determining the second readability measure comprises: applyingat least one of: a Flesch Readability Index, a Flesch-Kincaid GradeLevel, a Fog Index, a Bormuth Grade Level Readability Score, and aLexile Framework for Reading.
 13. A system for analyzing readability ofa communication intended for a target audience, the system configuredto: analyze the communication to determine a first readability measureassociated with the communication; determine a second readabilitymeasure associated with the target audience based on one or morehistorical communications previously transmitted or received by thetarget audience, the one or more historical communications comprising atleast a historical communication between an author of the communicationand the target audience; and generate a readability feedback signal forthe communication based on the first readability measure and the secondreadability measure.
 14. The system of claim 13, wherein determining thesecond readability measure associated with the target audiencecomprises: determining a primary historical readability measure based onthe historical communication between the author of the communication andthe target audience; and determining the second readability measureassociated with the target audience based on the primary historicalreadability measure.
 15. The system of claim 14, wherein determining thesecond readability measure associated with the target audience furthercomprises: determining a weighting value associated with the primaryhistorical readability measure based on whether the historicalcommunication between the author of the communication and the targetaudience was transmitted or received by an additional audience, whereinthe determining the second readability measure associated with thetarget audience is further based on the weighting value associated withthe primary historical readability measure.
 16. The system of claim 14,wherein determining the second readability measure associated with thetarget audience further comprises: determining a temporal weightingvalue associated with the primary historical readability measure basedon a time at which the historical communication between the author ofthe communication and the target audience was transmitted or received byan additional audience, wherein the determining the second readabilitymeasure associated with the target audience is further based on thetemporal weighting value associated with the primary historicalreadability measure.
 17. The system of claim 14, wherein determining thesecond readability measure associated with the target audience furthercomprises: identifying, from the one or more historical communications,a historical communication not between the author of the communicationand the target audience; determining a secondary primary historicalreadability measure based on the identified historical communication notbetween the author of the communication and the target audience; anddetermining the second readability measure associated with the targetaudience based on the secondary historical readability measure.
 18. Thesystem of claim 13, wherein generating the readability feedback signalcomprises: comparing the first readability measure and the secondreadability measure; and generating the readability feedback signalbased on a result of the comparing.
 19. The system of claim 17, whereingenerating the readability feedback signal comprises generating awarning signal when the result of the comparison indicates that adifference between the first readability measure and the secondreadability measure exceeds a threshold.
 20. The system of claim 13,wherein the communication comprises at least one of: an electronic textmaterial, an electronic document, a web page document, an electronicmessage, and an email.